As some may be aware, Georgetown University has invited Kathleen Gilligan Sebelius, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, to address it's graduate students at today's, (May 18, 2012), Georgetown Public Policy Institute's Awards Ceremony, following Georgetown's commencement ceremony. This has caused apoplexy in the all-male hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church, as she is somewhat responsible for, and defends, the Obama Administration's policy on the provision of contraception, in it's health mandate, for American women, even while remaining a Catholic herself, and continues to be a major thorn in the side of the Roman bishops, and a threat to their authority, relevance, and position in contemporary society.

Having many friends, (including some women religious, ..nuns.., who are my very dear friends) and family in the Roman Church, I am aware that recently, on many weekends, in many parishes, most American bishops have instructed that "pastoral letters" defending the Roman hierarchy's position be read to church goers, from the pulpits of the parish churches, thereby implying that the political positions of the Rome-appointed bishops, somehow reflect both the will of the Church, in general, (even though they have never asked the "church", (who by it's own theology, is "The Mystical Body of Christ"), what the church actually thinks about any current subject of controversy, and in fact has no current structure in place to actually determine what the will of the "Mystical Body" is) and by implication, the will of their god, and the will of Jesus of Nazareth, (their "savior", or "christ"), and also implying that the laity in the pews, do not have the right to make up their own minds on this subject, and indeed, in many cases stating, that unless the laity comply and agree with the position of the hierarchy, they are not "real Catholics", or "real" Christians. The bishops simply do not get that this "letter reading", (shoving their opinions down the throats of a captive audience, in a setting where no discussion is possible or allowed, or obviously even expected) is yet another deeply offensive patronising act to educated adults, and is another reason Church membership in the US is declining.

This "letter reading" is a part of their, (so-called), "magisterium", or "teaching" function, which the hierarchy of the Roman Church has appropriated to itself, as a part of it's authority model, and in general is justified by the line, which appears only in the Gospel of Matthew, (Chapter 16:18) : "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church", the line which indeed is carved into the encircling stone of the inside of the dome of St. Peter's, in Rome, "Tu es Petrus", etc. (which of course is somewhat ironic, since the Apostles would not have known what Yeshua ben Josef, ..Jesus.. was talking about, since at the time, there was no such thing as a "church", and the term "eccesia" is a Greek word, which obviously Yeshua would not have used http://www.aggressivechristianity.net/ar...clesia.htm ), and also because the Christian community to which Matthew was addressed was the Jewish sub-community of Christians, which did not, at the time, even call themselves "christian", nor had they yet, historically, developed the consciousness of themselves as a separate group, (outside Judaism). (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/...tthew.html ).

So pehaps it might be good to look at this authority model, and see where it is deeply flawed, biblically, theologically, and historically.

Raymond Cardinal Burke, (of St. Louis), whose pretty picture is above...the one in the dress...(no, the one on the right, ...the "suffering servant"...maybe they just didn't have the purple in his size ?), has stated that :

Quote: “To the degree to which (Sebelius) proclaims herself to be a practicing Catholic, she is very wrong,”, “it is simply incomprehensible” for a Catholic to “support the kind of measures that she is supporting.”

This is somewhat humorous in context, since the bishops are demanding the laity comply, yet insisting from out of the other side of their mouths, that what is at stake is "freedom of religion", something which they do not grant to their own sheep, nor does he do anything, other than, as usual, think that all he needs to do, in 2012, is to "proclaim" something, and that doing the proclamation is somehow going to be good enough to obtain obedience, and that somehow he possess the "authority" to obtain that obedience. The implication further being, that in order for someone to be a "real Catholic" one must give up one's rationality, and simply agree, (albeit dishonestly), with the position, which was arrived at, in it's usual mysterious fashion. Burke has told Sebelius to refrain from receiving "communion", (also ironic, as by their own theology it is the ultimate uncharitable act .. refusing inclusion at the Table of the Lord), even though their supposed founder, Yeshua, (Jesus), gave communion to Judas, (who was about to betray him), at the Last Supper, thus making Burke "holier than Thou", and more "righteous" than Jesus.

In Roman Moral Theology, Mortal Sin, (by their own definition..in their own "Catechism",) has three requirements : a. serious matter, b. knowledge or "firm belief", and c. full consent of the will. Burke has somehow determined what is inside Sebelius' head, and condemned her, stating that "she is in a state of 'serious error' ", (Mortal Sin). Maybe Burke should go back to 3rd Grade Catholic School, since, obviously, neither he, nor any human, has any way of determining what is the actual state of Sebeius' conscience.

The majority of women in the Roman Catholic Church, (by their own theology .. the "Mystical Body of Christ"), of child-bearing age, use some form of birth control. Thus, the "real church", (NOT the hierarchy), does approve of, and uses, birth control.

The unspoken, fallacious assumption/premise, is that the hierarchy is the church.

While we're disposing of unspoken fallacious premises, let's stop for a moment, and rid ourselves of one more. A term often used in the debate, is "artificial birth control". The definition of "artifical" is debated, but the use of hormones is never challenged, in other contexts. Ingesting hormones for any other purpose is not deemed "artificial", or challenged in any way. Nor is the taking of drugs by men to "artificially" alter their sexual performance, challenged in any way by the male Roman hierarchy, nor has it been an issue in the current debates. Nope. It's just about old men, controlling young women, and their bodies. Kinda creepy, actually.

The foundations of Roman Philosophy and Theology have been rocked by Science, and a large crack in the Aristotelian/Thomistic concept of "Natural Law" has been exposed, in the gay marriage debate, as we came to understand that same-sex interactions were not "unnatural", but indeed the norm, in all of nature. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/200...6122106.ht Another serious challenge has been posed by the advances in Physics, and Quantum Mechanics to the Thomistic argument of First Cause, by the realization that at a Singularity, time, (actually spacetime, as proven by Einstein), comes to a stop, (or does not exist prior), and ceases to exist, thus saying "before the Big Bang" is a meaningless phrase, and "creation", or "creative act" also requires the dimension of time, a priori, thus is meaningless. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo The Physicists are laughing at the Theologians. They may or may not know it yet.

There is also a completely artificial semantic game played by the Roman Church in it's creation of a "distinction without a difference" with birth control, when they say that "Natural Family Planning" is acceptable, as moral, even while maintaining, in their own Moral Theology, that the ultimate determining factor in a moral choice, is "intention". The "intent", no matter how it's done, by definition, of "Family Planning", is to MAKE A PLAN..an intentional act to prevent a pregnancy, which can include a whole series of intentional acts, (temperature taking, abstaining on certain days, even going to classes, etc etc,). Apparently they have a REALLY dumb god, who is unaware of their intentions.

The Pontifical Commission, set up by Pope John XXXIII, inside the Roman Curia, was given the job, back in the 1960's, to determine the impact of "artificial" birth control on the Roman Church. The disagreements within the commission ultimately led to the publication of the Papal Encyclical, Humanae Vitae, by Paul VI.

When birth control finally arrived, and gave women control over their reproductive systems, with the first oral contraceptives in 1960, dissenters in the Church argued for a reconsideration of the Church positions, on the subject and, in 1963 Pope John XXIII established the above commission, consisting of six European non-theologians to study questions of birth control and populations. After he died in 1963, Pope Paul VI added theologians to the commission and expanded it to 72 members from five continents (including 16 theologians, 13 physicians and five women without medical credentials, with an executive committee of 16 bishops, including seven cardinals).

The commission produced a report in 1966, proposing that ("artificial") birth control was not intrinsically evil and that Catholic couples should be allowed to decide for themselves about, or if, they wished to employ (any) method of birth control. According to the majority report, the use of contraceptives should be regarded as an extension of the already accepted cycle method:

Quote:
The acceptance of a lawful application of the calculated sterile periods of the woman--that the application is legitimate presupposes right motives--makes a separation between the sexual act which is explicitly intended and its reproductive effect which is intentionally excluded. The tradition has always rejected seeking this separation with a contraceptive intention for motives spoiled by egoism and hedonism, and such seeking can never be admitted. The true opposition is not to be sought between some material conformity to the physiological processes of nature and some artificial intervention. For it is natural to man to use his skill in order to put under human control what is given by physical nature. The opposition is really to be sought between one way of acting which is contraceptive and opposed to a prudent and generous fruitfulness, and another way which is, in an ordered relationship to responsible fruitfulness and which has a concern for education and all the essential, human and Christian values.

Paul VI chose to reject the Majority Report, and issued Humanae Vitae, (and disregard the opinions of his OWN eminent theologians and experts), inexplicably.

There is evidence in the Vatican archives, and elsewhere, that Pope JohnPaul I, during his brief reign, was about to reverse the ban, or at the very least, downgrade it to a non-serious matter, and indeed the night before his death, (murder), the papers doing so were seen lying on his desk, in the "appartamento pontifico", in the Apostolic Palace, and have since disappeared, and never been found. The fact that the events observed by the Benedictine nuns in the Papal household, during the evening hours the night before, and during the night of the murder, were sealed forever, and lost to history, by the insistence of the Cardinal Camerlengo, (the Cardinal who stands in for the Pope after his death, during the "sede vacante"..the period of the "empty chair" http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/SV1978.html ), Jean Cardinal Villot .. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Marie_Villot.....

(...who indeed was fired the day before the murder, from his position as Secretary of State, along with his co-conspirator, Sebastiano Cardinal Baggio, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastiano_Baggio ), who also was removed from office the day before the murder, and when told he was reassigned to the vacant seat in Venice, (the seat Luciani (JPI) had held), to become the Patriarch of Venice, had simply flatly refused, and said "no I won't go"...to the Pope !!!, (the same Pope who was held in such condescending contempt (as "that hick from Venice", by the inner Patrician power circle in the Vatican). He along with Villot, was involved with the American Bishop, Paul Marcinkus, (The President of the Vatican Bank http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Marcinkus, who for many months, evaded arrest by Italian authorities, by making sure he did not set foot outside of Vatican City), in drug dealing, and other questionable financial deals, which led, ultimately, to the bankruptcy of the Banco Ambrosiano, (in Milan), which was detailed by David Yallop, in his book, "In God's Name", and confirmed by Paul L. Williams in his book "Money, Murder, and the Mafia, ...the Vatican Exposed".

.....that what the nuns had observed during that night concerning Albino Luciani..JPI..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_John_Paul_I), were to remain forever secret, and that they take a vow of perpetual silence concerning their observations, leads one to believe that the reversal of the ban on birth control was seen by the right wing in the Vatican to be of such huge importance to the Roman Curia, that they could not accept the changes, and saw the immanent threat, for what it was. Since he had so upset the apple cart in only one month of service as Pontiff, (refusing coronation, receiving the Socialist/Communist politicians from South America), they saw him as a very serious threat. They simply got rid of him.

Thus, the fact is, if the murder had not happened, the Roman bishops today, would not be "teaching" what they are "teaching". and in fact, would be defending precisely the opposite position, and using the arguments of their own theologians to argue precisely the opposite position, because the duly elected Pope had made the (supposedly "divinely" directed) decision to "teach" precisely the OPPOSITE position. Of course this also raises the question whether God intended the murder to happen, and would be seen as His will, thus raising the whole question of "free will" but we'll leave that can of worms for another time, except to say, that science has now proven, by MRI, (Magnetic Resonance technology), that decisions are made before humans are conscious of the decision, thus "free will" is yet another large crack in the foundation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6S9OidmNZM , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ4nwTTmcgs , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ_YMPxkfXM , thus further invalidating the "salvation" paradigm, (which historically arose is Christianity long after the death of Yeshua..introduced first by Saul of Tarsus, (St. Paul)..many years after his, (Yeshua's) death..but that also will be left for another time). (The "priest" may have an obsolete job description).

There are also other recent developments, which you may have seen this past week on CNN, with respect to this scandal. The Italian Mafia had deposited large sums of money in the Banco Ambrosiano, and blamed the mismanagement by the Vatican for the loss of over 200 million dollars. As revenge, for the loss, they most likely were responsible for the disappearance, and murder of Emanuela Orlandi, the daughter of a Vatican official, and recent developments have led officals to question whether her bones are in, or near, the grave of Enrico De Pedis. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/14...14102.html , and the investigation of that matter is ongoing.

JPI was a warm and gentle man, and in one of the only remaining vestiges of "real authority approbation" (which might allow for the action of their "Holy Spirit", by their OWN theology) was elected, but then quickly removed by the power elite, within the Vatican, thus Humanae Vitae stands to this day as their anachronistic position on the subject.

As the Roman Church continues to melt down, as a result of the sex scandals, and membership in the "Northern Church", (America and Europe), declines, it is important to remember that the Church which says it is built on "Scripture and Tradition", in fact picks and chooses which "tradition" is convenient. The actual "traditional" way "presbyters" or early church leaders were chosen was by election. THAT is the original "tradition". The fact, that there is also no mechanism, allowing for their "Spirit" to act, except by "appointments", (under the "Divine Right of Kings model..top down..as opposed the the biblical, "spirit working among us".."bottom up" model), makes the Roman Church's authority model not only un-biblical, but, (ever since the Enlightenment, authority is now seen by humans to arise from the "consent of the governed"), also non-historical, and the present authority model is doomed to become an anachronism in history, and ultimately spells it's demise, unless it is changed, to account for the now very well educated, literate laity, who no longer sit in pews as sheep, unlike their Medieval counter-parts, much to the consternation of the Roman bishops, who sit in their Chancery Offices, apoplectic that they no longer command obedience. Case in point : Timothy Cardinal Dolan, of New York, now the current President of the American Conference of Catholic Bishops, has frequently, in recent weeks, been proclaiming that the societal change in the attitudes towards gay marriage is a threat to the foundations of society, and while there are many Sociological studies that prove him wrong, he NEVER ONCE sites one study which supports his position. He thinks, that as an appointed official, he commands authority, simply by virtue of that appointment. In fact, he does not. His attitudes reflect only his conservative appointors.

Ironically, the final word on THIS matter, (even while we wait for the Supreme Court's decision on Prop 8), wasn't made by either Dolan, or the Pope, (or anyone else, intentionally), but was actually uttered already by the Plaintiff's Attorney, in our State of California's Appeals Court Decision on Prop 8. When asked by one of the three Appeals Court judges, at the very end of the 9 month proceedings, "How exactly does same-sex marriage threaten traditional marriage", he replied, in open court .... "I don't know".

Another example of authority gone mad, was the recent "who-ha" or War on Women Religious, by Rome, against the senior ELECTED women, in the Roman Church's communities of Women Religious, .... the charitable, hard working, unrecognized women, who founded and run the hospitals where Americans continue to get their health care. The Second Vatican Council's Pastoral Constitution, (The Church in the Modern World), stated that : "With respect to the fundamental rights of the person, every type of discrimination, whether social or cultural, whether based on sex, race, color, social condition, language or religion, is to be overcome and eradicated as contrary to God's intent". http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/19/...s-20120420http://www.care2.com/causes/dispatches-f...nanas.html
For more on this, please see the excellent article by Sister Mary Luke Tobin in the current Catholic magazine "America". http://www.americamagazine.org/content/a...e_id=11898

The fact is, nothing will turn back the clock. Many women now choose to stay and fight, and instead of just walking away, (which would be perfectly reasonable, and understandable), and now say "it's my church too, I'm NOT leaving". And I say "good on ya", "hurray for them". They could care less about Rome, or what "the old guy"..(which the ACTUALLY SAY TO ME), at the Chancery says..all they care about, is teaching immigrants to read, and healing the sick, (...doing the WORK).

The preposterous notion that relative circulating hormone levels, (testosterone, and estrogen), (ie whether a human being is either a man or a woman), could make the slightest difference to a Lord of the Universe, is simply not viable.

There will no doubt be protestors at Ms. Sebelius' speech. The current simplistic debate on abortion is, at least in part, due to a psychological need, to grasp (the), one final (apparent) "absolute", in the "moral relativism" debate. In fact it no longer works. The Romans assert that "life begins at the 'moment' of conception". Science has debunked that childish notion. There is NO "moment". The fact that twinning can occur up to two weeks after conception, raises the question of when exactly the "soul is infused", as does the inconvenient fact that no OBGYN physician will state when EXACTLY that "moment" is.
Is it when :
a. sperm approaches egg ?
b. 1st electron of sperm cell enters electron cloud of egg cell ?
c. sperm contacts egg wall ?
d. sperm 1/2 way into egg ?
e. sperm entirely in egg ?
f. DNA of sperm contacts DNA of egg ?
g. DNA replication begins ?
h. DNA replication 0.567534521897 % complete ?
i. 1st DNA replication complete, (poof..soul enters) ?
j. 2nd DNA completes ?
k. zygote forms ?
l. zygote multiplies ?
m. zygote begins to travel ?
l. zygote approaches endometrial wall ?
m. zygote touches endometrial wall ?
n. zygote implants in endometrial wall ?

The paradigm is simply outdated.

May is the traditional Catholic month of Mary, where Spring, resurrection, and rejuvenation are celebrated. I suggest that instead of listening to the outdated Roman version, ("Marian Dogma") we would do well to look at the lectures about the "Mother Goddess", and see that the Marian iteration, is but one example of the Myth of the Mother Goddess, or the many Western Myths concerning "Courtly Love", ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtly_love ) and the Arthurian legends http://www.timelessmyths.com/arthurian/ ) and the hugely civilizing force that (idealized) women have been in Western Culture, and continue to be. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Campbell

No one cares any more about what the appointed Cardinal Archbishops of Washington, New York , or the Pope, think or say about anything. They have NO authority.

Kathleen, on the other hand, has more than enough.

Insufferable know-it-all.
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche

RE: Kathleen Sebelius, Women, and the flawed authority model of the Roman Catholic Church

Hey Bucky, I want to thank you for putting this post together. It must have taken hours. Thanks for the links too. Sorry I just didn't see it earlier.

It seems very likely to me that that the Vatican is on the verge of a serious collapse in their credibility...not amongst people like "us," as we already see through them, but amongst the faithful. They are desperately out of touch with community opinion re pedophilia, contraceptives and the legitimacy of their own authoriity.

Yet....they have seriously large funds at their disposal and they're not going to fade away without a fight. Like any massive corporation, they will use money to shore up their income.

It is interesting to read all the bulls and encyclicals put out by the Vatican over the last 700 years or so. With the small exception of parts of Vatican 2, they have always instructed people to behave in a way that bolsters the power of their church. Nothing they have proclaimed has ever had any value in the humanistic sense(or if it has it is coincidental) For example they oppose contraception only because they want catholics to reproduce so there are more little bums on church seats.

RE: Kathleen Sebelius, Women, and the flawed authority model of the Roman Catholic Church

Mark,
Please don't tell me what happened in Vatican 2... I haven't seen Vatican 1 yet.
Bucky,
Great post, thanks for the enlightenment. At the end you mention Courtly Love; she's the one who hung around with that dude from Nirvana, right?

RE: Kathleen Sebelius, Women, and the flawed authority model of the Roman Catholic Church

As a traditionalistic catholic none of what you said has bothered me. In fact for the most part I dislike Vatican 2. Although I really don't know anything about contraception as I really don't care about it, I accept the word of the pope and the Hierarchy. I've never really believed in authority derived from the consensus of the people.

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc

RE: Kathleen Sebelius, Women, and the flawed authority model of the Roman Catholic Church

(20-05-2012 03:23 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote: In fact for the most part I dislike Vatican 2. Although I really don't know anything about contraception as I really don't care about it, I accept the word of the pope and the Hierarchy. I've never really believed in authority derived from the consensus of the people.

Not at all surprising. (I didn't write it to upset anyone.) Why would it upset a non-Catholic ? Stating that one "dislikes" Vatican II, belies a position which is essentially anti-Catholic. The Catholic Church teaches that the Holy Spirit works through the assembled bishops, in council, and the position that one might have the option to disregard any one teaching or other, is but another example of the "picking and choosing" described above, (and in fact heretical). The fact is John XXXIII legitimately called the council, (by their laws), and the Pope, (Paul VI) continued it, and that it was in no way "illegitimate", is yet another example of inconsistency, and while at the same time stating that one accepts the authority of the hierarchy, one has just proven that one does not. The fact that one thinks one can "ignore" or "dislike" what one chooses to ignore or dislike, is evidence that one is not really a Catholic, (by their definition), only by one's personal definition, (something which millions of Catholics do today...which is in fact so common that it has a name ..."cafeteria catholic"). Saying one does not know about birth control, (an argument from ignorance), is unconvincing.

Obviously one does NOT accept the word of pope and hieracrchy, as they leigitimately proclaimed the Four Constitutions, the Nine Decrees, and the Three Declarations, at the end of Vatican II, and placing oneself in a position of "disliking" this or that, implies one thas the choice, in Roman Catholicism to do that. One may think that. They would not agree. The fact that one does, (at least apparently, sporadically) accept the "authority" based on something, leads an observer to conclude that the acceptance of the authority model has never been examined, since one is unable to articulate it, ..... which is not unexpected, since it is indeed the norm. 50 % of American Catholics cannot state what is meant by "transubstatiation".

To say that a flaw in the reasoning of Aquinas does not matter, simply betrays the ignorance of the the structural foundations of the House of Peter Cards.

"Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition are collectively known as the Deposit of Faith. This is in turn interpreted by the Magisterium, or the teaching authority of the Church. The Magisterium includes those pronouncements of the pope that are considered infallible, as well as the pronouncements of ecumenical councils and those of the College of Bishops in union with the pope when they condemn false interpretations of scripture or define truths."

One can tell oneself one is a Catholic, even though one may not be. If one can dismiss Vatican II, then one can dismiss Vatican I, and Trent, and Nicaea.

Fascinating one doesn't believe in Democracy. One would favor dictatorships ? Alrighty then. The present authority model is derived from the consensus of some of the people, and in fact has developed through a known, entirely human, historical process, (generally the counsillar one). There was no "point" where "divine intervention" provided a "full blown" model, which started running, at any given point.

Insufferable know-it-all.
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche

Tarzan, tell us why you believe the pope. I'm intrigued. Also, how many kids you got?

Speaking of transubstantiation ... was so humorous watching Pell and Dawkins talking about this. Dawkins said, (something like), "whatever you MEAN by 'change to body and blood' it's NOT what we generally mean by that in the English language, and MUST mean something 'else' ". Pell replied, "I say what I mean", (audience laughs), and then Pell proceeded to explain that precisely what Dawkins had said IS what he thinks. He said it transforms, (NOT in a "physical form"), but to an "Idealized", (as in Greek "Idealism") form of some (spooky) "idea" of "body and blood". (I vaguely remember from Theology class them trying to say there was a difference between "accident" and "substance" .. which I guess is the same thing .. or "woo-woo" for "I',m making this up as I go along" ). How desperate can they get. The House of Cards is crashing.

Insufferable know-it-all.
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche

RE: Kathleen Sebelius, Women, and the flawed authority model of the Roman Catholic Church

Impressive, Bucky! I'm still chewing on it.

Quote:Mark wrote: It seems very likely to me that that the Vatican is
on the verge of a serious collapse in their credibility...not amongst
people like "us," as we already see through them, but amongst the
faithful. They are desperately out of touch with community opinion re
pedophilia, contraceptives and the legitimacy of their own authoriity.

Yet....they have seriously large funds at their disposal and they're not going to
fade away without a fight. Like any massive corporation, they will use
money to shore up their income.

The RC church' wealth is legendary. With the bulk in real estate and iffy investments and share holdings. It's probably also rather overstated. It is not infinite. Especially not at the rate the millions of damages are currently flowing out to abused children in out of court settlements! And there are hundreds of thousands if not millions more of them. By the time that wave of claimants dies out, we will be another couple decades on. The RC church will be totally bankrupt long before.

Afaik the majority of US RC dioceses are already bankrupt right now as a result of those 'settlements'! Which are just as many admissions of guilt of course. It's a PR nightmare for the RC church. And it's costing them gazillions to keep the cases out of the public (court) records. It's the most expensive whitewash operation in history. Ongoing. And bound to fail. The RC church will run out of cash long before they will run out of victims pressuring/blackmailing them into those 'settlements'.

The RC church is a byzantine international power structure that has managed, by hook and by crook, to remain a powerful realm, a global 'superpower' in itself for over 1,700 years! No other civilisation or organisation in human history, afaik, ever managed that!
Gotta give those clowns credit for that at least!
Scratch 'clowns', insert 'Machiavellian mind and soul corruptors'.

But all superpowers come to an end eventually. And I think we're watching the collapse of the RC church in our lifetime.